Nation v. Gueffroy

3 Citing cases

  1. Willard v. Hutson

    234 Or. 148 (Or. 1963)   Cited 11 times

    It is asserted by the defendants that this was a medical fact "beyond the ken of laymen." Reference is made to Nation v. Gueffroy, 172 Or. 673, 142 P.2d 688, 144 P.2d 296, in which case there was a total absence of expert testimony as to the standard of care to be employed by a physician in treating the plaintiff's injury and a directed verdict for the defendant was sustained. The decision applied the established rule in this class of cases.

  2. McKee Electric Co. v. Carson Oil Co.

    301 Or. 339 (Or. 1986)   Cited 27 times
    Holding that expert testimony was not an essential part of the plaintiffs res ipsa loquitor negligence claim

    This is the same rule which is applied in other cases which frequently involve technical, scientific issues such as medical malpractice cases. See, e.g., Getchell v. Mansfield, 260 Or. 174, 489 P.2d 953 (1971); Nation v. Gueffroy, 172 Or. 673, 142 P.2d 688, 144 P.2d 296 (1943); Annot., 40 ALR3d 515 (1971); Annot., 81 ALR2d 597 (1962)."

  3. Lynd v. Rockwell Manufacturing Co.

    276 Or. 341 (Or. 1976)   Cited 15 times

    This is the same rule which is applied in other cases which frequently involve technical, scientific issues such as medical malpractice cases. See, e.g., Getchell v. Mansfield, 260 Or. 174, 489 P.2d 953 (1971); Nation v. Gueffroy, 172 Or. 673, 142 P.2d 688, 144 P.2d 296 (1943); Annot., 40 ALR3d 515 (1971); Annot., 81 ALR2d 597 (1962). In this case, the jury had the benefit of extensive explanations and demonstrations of the saw and its components by plaintiff, who was an experienced woodworker.